Petitioner sought anticipatory bail under section 438 Cr.P.C. in a cheating case. The court dismissed the petition, holding the petitioner was a partner in the travel business accused of cheating and had multiple other pending cases against him.
Anticipatory bail application dismissed; petition filed by Labh Singh rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
Crl. Misc. No.M-12824 of 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No. M-12824 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: January 12th, 2012
Labh Singh .... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
.... Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK
1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present Mr. Surinder Dhull, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. A.S.Rai, D. A.G. Punjab, for the State assisted by Mr. Ranjivan, Advocate, for the complainant.
VIJENDER SINGH MALIK, J.
Labh Singh, petitioner has sought pre-arrest bail by way of this petition brought under section 438 Cr. P.C. in a case registered by way of FIR No. 51 dated 28.3.2011 at Police Station Morinda, District Rup Nagar, for an offence punishable under sections 420, 406 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code. It is a case where the complainant Satnam Singh is stated to have been cheated in a sum of Rs.9,25,000/- in the name of sending him to Italy by the petitioner and his co-accused, namely, Varinder Kumar Arora and Surinder Bhardwaj.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the complainant claims to have been cheated twice. According to him, though in the first instance, the petitioner had directed the complainant to
2
Crl. Misc. No.M-12824 of 2011
Varinder Kumar Arora saying that he is in the business of sending people abroad, yet this time, he has not even directed the complainant to Varinder Kumar Arora. According to him, in the first instance, while he was in the process of being sent abroad, he was intercepted when his visa was found forged. According to him, after some time, the complainant again fell in the trap of Varinder Kumar Arora and Surinder Bhardwaj and again parted with additional money in their favour on the promise of sending him abroad.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner is in government service and in the earlier case, he was arrested and was granted regular bail. He has submitted that the petitioner has no connection with the second episode in which the complainant is stated to have been cheated by Varinder Kumar Arora and not the petitioner. He has submitted that he is also not named in the second FIR.
Learned State counsel has submitted, on the other hand, that there are three cases pending against the petitioner and that the petitioner is also involved in a rape case, which is pending trial. According to him, the court had directed the State to file an affidavit regarding the details of other pending cases against the petitioner and that Wazir Singh, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Chamkaur Sahib, District Roopnagar had filed an affidavit to this effect. According to him, he is named in the second FIR also and this petitioner is a partner with Varinder Kumar Arora and others in the business run in the name of 'Global Travels'.
Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is named in the
3
Crl. Misc. No.M-12824 of 2011
second FIR and that he is a partner of Varinder Kumar Arora in the business run as 'Global Travels' and that a number of cases are pending against him, he does not seem to be entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail. The petition is, consequently, dismissed.
(VIJENDER SINGH MALIK) JUDGE
January 12, 2012 som
3 issues framed by the court
Whether petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail given pending cases and partnership in business.
Whether petitioner is implicated in the second FIR related to cheating.
Whether to grant pre-arrest bail under section 438 Cr.P.C.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Labh Singh
State of Punjab
Vijender Singh Malik
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
